Nova Scotia (and New Brunswick to a lesser degree) have a brutal history of racism that most of them deny. The blacks here arrived as slaves accompanying their masters, lfleeiing the American Revolution.  Some later came from the West Indies. But there was no substantial industry here like growing cotton - and any desirable land or work was grabbed by the Whites. The Blacks were settled in groups on land nobody else wanted. Social abuse was severe, until very, very recently.

I shall always remember the day I went off the main road some miles from Halifax. I came to a forest that reminded me of one of the bleaker scenes from Wizard of Oz. Then there was a small clearingn. On it was a bedraggled old wooden building. Across the front of it was a huge sign, the only colour I saw in the dismal area. The sign read

"Nova Scotia Home for Coloured Children"

As for the United Church having an official one on racial abuse, It don't think it needs one. It would matter if any mainstream church in Canada was in favour of racial abuse - but none is, of course. And their is criminal law on the subject.

Where the church can be useful is in letting us know where it exists, and how it manifests itself. Now, that is something the UC should have been doing from its birth.

Why the capitalization on the word "YOUNG"? Would it make it any less wrong if they were old??

I'm guessing the capitalisation is because racism is thought of something that is (hopefully) passing away, a trait of older generations that we are outgrowing.

This just made me so sick to my stomach.  I live in Halifax and I didn't understand the depth of racism here until I lived to Toronto where there seems to be so much less.  I don't know what the solution is to end racism here.  I know that I treat people differently since I returned here. The fact that this happened right before the announcement of repairations for the razing of Africville just made it so much harder to bear.  I've joined the facebook group supporting the family.  I didn't read the story posted as it has been on the radio almost nonstop here.  I'm am just so sickened by that kind of behavior.

Ummmmm......Cross burning = bad?

Ahhhh just a couple of losers trying to get attention .....

Probably not, but call the Conference Office and ask. Racism has a long history in many parts of Canada. Curiously, the Pioneer Company (military engineers) of the 104th (New Brunswick) Regiment of Foot in the War of 1812 was all black.

http://www.warof1812.ca/104th.htm

A couple of dangerous losers. It's the stupid ones who are most dangerous.

oh, in answer to the question, does the church have a position? Yes. It's called the New Testament. Ir cannot possibly have each of the wrongs that could be committed by name.  Just on the issue of racism, you could fill a large books with titles of things that should or should not be done.

But this can certainly be a wake up call to clergy in Nova Scotia, at least, for this Sunday. And, given the serious and long standing nature of this ugliness, the sermon should just be a starting point.

What would you like the church to do?

The same thing we would do for any such outrageous sign of an "ism" or hate.

speak out

good grief, i thought we were past this as well.

It's heartbreaking -- it must have been terrifying for that family. I wonder how they are doing now...so often, in violent situations, people are affected for a long time after the actual event.

Pinga, of course speak out, but I always think it is wise to check in with those that are most offended.

I am offended hearing about the prejudice but probably not on the same level as those directly in the line of fire.

I just asked because the church has a history of not asking what should be done and boldly making something "their priority" without listening to what really needs to be addressed.

We can be empathetic on a secondary level but being "attacked" just because we're black will never be fully understood by a white person. And yes we're all people but some yahoos have chosen to attack based solely on their fear of an exterior difference.

I think we can all play a role in obliterating prejudice but standing in solidarity with any people that are being oppressed takes listening and understanding from their unique perspective, which is I why asked, (along with speaking out), "what would you like the church to do?"

I just saw on the news that the people of the town (Windsor, NS) were all out in a parade of support for the family.  Two young men, from a neighbouring village, have been arrested.  Let's hope that the family is able to put this terrible experience behind them and realize the the majority of Maritimers are not like these men. 

well, I'm glad to hear of the demonstration in support of those who were attacked. But racism is still more widespread than maritimers are willing to admit - and unwilling to see.

What the churches can do is something they have not done much at all for over two hundred years. Discuss this with congregations. Invite Blacks to join the discussions. Many a minister would give a sermon on that otherss (not present) are doing. Now, they have to make the congregants confront themselves.

Invite Blacks to join the discussions.

Well don't that just sound purty darn good .............

Invite blacks

Invite blacks

Invite blacks

think about how condescending that sounds for a second

if someone sed that to me ... i'd RSVP some whoop ass

 I come as rather skeptical like jeouhaite777

waterfall said, 

I think we can all play a role in obliterating prejudice but standing in solidarity with any people that are being oppressed takes listening and understanding from their unique perspective, which is I why asked, (along with speaking out), "what would you like the church to do?"

I am glad you said this waterfall, because I don't think it ever happens - or, sorry, that it happens enough.

seeler said, 

Let's hope that the family is able to put this terrible experience behind them and realize the the majority of Maritimers are not like these men. 

Black peoples and mixed-race families don't give a damn whether the majority of Maritimers are such a way or not.  I imagine the family doesn't know the majority of Maritimers.  Just stop with the burning crosses...

I have an idea (not the same experience, but an idea) of what it's like as I've faced the insults and the people who drive by with their tattoos and shaved heads shouting out the window as they drive by, "White POWER!"

This stuff is widespread...

Welcome to Wonder Cafe, Adam. I don't think I've seen you here before. With respect, may I point out that you never asked

You actually asked whether the church had an official position on the issue. Those are different questions. I, too, doubt that the church has an "official" position on the issue, for the simple reason that some things are so obvious that the church doesn't need an "official" position. I mean, as far as I know, we have no "official" position (ie, an official, written, approved by GCE statement) on murder or bank robbery. I think people just kind of know we're against those things, just as we're against cross-burning.

The question of what I'd like to see the church do is a tough one. I can't relate to your experience. I admit that. I'm white (I'm also male and heterosexual and able-bodied.)  I don't claim to really know the extent to which racism is a problem (please understand, I'm not saying it isn't a problem; I'm saying that I can't know how deep the problem is because I don't experience it.) The closest I've ever come I suppose is being verbally bullied by a gang of school thugs throughout Grade 7 & 8. I guess the only reason it was just verbal is because I demonstrated early on that I'd stand up for myself against physical stuff, and, like most bullies, once they knew that I'd defend myself those who were picking on me didn't have the guts to actually back up their words with actions. That was actually a valuable life lesson. Still, being subjected to insults and ridicule made for a pretty hellish two years, and I have literally no fond memories or nostalgic feelings toward the school I was in for those two years. I hated the place then; I probably don't hate it now, but it leaves me cold to this day to think about it. Anyway, that's another issue, but it's the closest thing I can think of to give me any understanding of how it feels to be subjected to racism. Because I can't truly relate to the issue you're asking about, though, I don't honestly think it's my place to say what I'd "like" the church to do. I don't mean that as a cop-out. I really think I need those who are the victims of racism (words or actions) to tell me what the church "needs" to do. I'll listen, and I'll do my best to act against it, but it's so outside my experience that I don't know that I can generate an answer within myself.

Anyway, blessings to you, Adam. Hope things are going well.

The United Church of Canada has a position on racisim

http://www.united-church.ca/beliefs/policies/2000/t314

it would apply to this situation.

Ironic that you propose that the family doesn't know the majority of Maritimers, but you, apparently, know the majority of Black and mixed-race families and can speak for them.

Yes, hate exists and it is ugly and evil but I propose that it does matter what the majority of us think! If we accept your statement then we should do nothing? That is what we, the "majority", have done for centuries. The residents of Windsor stood up in support of the family, and this also shows the cross-burning minority that their actions will not be tolerated.

I also rile at the idea that one has to be a part of a persecuted minority in order to have a valid opinion. I am white, english middle class. Do I not understand simply based on that? Over 10 years ago now, on the commons in Halifax, I was beaten and put in the hospital by 4 black teens. Why? I have male-pattern baldness. We have three choices: 1-combover (yuck) 2-Look bald or 3-Shaved head. In this day and age many many people have shaved heads. Does that mean they are skinheads and racist? Nope. Am I? Nope. Was I judged by my appearance? Yes. Do I understand at least a little? Can I at least empathize?

Kilnerad, I am not attacking you because you are black, I am posting this because you are narrow minded and arrogant. It is attitudes like yours that perpetuate racism from the other side. Too often I hear something like "You don't understand, so don't bother." I know we can never fully understand, but would it not make more sense to help us understand? Wouldn't it be better to side with those who stand up and support you rather than trying to insulate yourself in your own community and let the bitterness and hate fester?

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

I admit that I can't get into the head of a black person - I am white - poor white, but white.  But I do know what it is like to be on the outside.  I grew up literally 'on the wrong side of the tracks'.  I attended a school where people from my village were looked down on by the town community.   I was poor, under educated, ignorant when I moved from a small rural Maritime village to a large city in another province. 

But no, I don't know what it is like to be black.

But I do know that if I were frightened by being attacked and threatened by others, and I imagined that they might reflect the feelings of my neighbours, I would feel a great deal more secure, valued and wanted if the majority of the  community turned out in mass to offer their support, and condemned the attack against me. 

No, the attack should never have happened.  But this couple and their two children do not need to move away or hide - they have a community who have stood up for them. 

Don't know if this post was directed at my comment or not, but I'll reply anyway. I think what you experienced is horrible and unacceptable. I also think that anyone can have a valid opinion; in fact, I would go as far as saying that all opinions are valid opinions. What I wrote I applied only to myself. I have never experienced racism - and I believe that a big part of the reason for that is because I'm white. That doesn't mean that no white person ever experiences racism. Speaking for myself, though, I've never experienced it as far as I can recall, and therefore - while I may have an opinion - I, personally, do not understand what it's like to be a victim of racism. 

Oh, Jsuehaite, grow. I did not suggest they should just tolk. The idea was to confront the congregation with the evidence of the extent of racism. And how can you do that if they'd never even spoken to a black? Once you begin to grasp it, then you can go on to deal with it.

On - don't assume only blacks can know what prejudice is. Chinese, Japanese and Jews have had more than their share. But I didn't uncerstand that until I got to know them.

As well, it can happen to whites. I grew up English in a district of Montreal that was over 90% French. Attacks by French gangs were a regular occurence, as well as assaults by biegger kids who would attack at the sound of an English word. Our church was stoned by a French gang, smashing windows. The politice station was across the street. But there was no police intervention. That latter parrt was common. A frienc was beaten with brass knuclies in front of the church. Again, no police. Later, because of my role in an English rights groups at the time of Bill 101, my life was threatened, and we many times we had to evacuate our offices on warnings of an attack. When our offices were torcned, it wa obvious that both the police and the French journalists were intereested in findly only an anglo arsonist.

I, personally, do not understand what it's like to be a victim of racism

well said

regardless of colour everyone has the ability to be morons and even racist morons not just white people .....

the huge misconception being that all cultural groups get along and are against the white race 

i don't know what your cultural experience is outside of white people and black people Kilnerad but I can guarantee you and assure you that different ethnic groups  have their own set of racist  slurs and stereotypes just like anyone else .....

I think maybe you are taking my words and putting them in Kilnerads mouth?

Personally I don't think dealing with four black men over being bald compares to generations of being told that being black was anything but beautiful. Depending on where one livess, I'm sure it's not an isolated incidence for minorities but an everyday occurance where one has to constantly reinforce the goodness through self talk and gathering with others whose experience reflects their own. I don't see this as promoting segregation but promoting self preservation while existing in a predominately white north america (for now anyway).

 I heard clearly,

kilnerad say, "Just stop with the burning crosses"

So I'm wondering if we have to take some responsibility for the actions of a few and be forced to admit that  that there is a problem still and doesn't just exist from another "era"? Our complaceny may have led us to "not stand on guard" anymore and believe that the problem has been resolved when in fact it may still be brewing underground only waiting to rear it's ugly head once again with our children.

Do we need to ensure the story of Martin Luther Kings "dream"  is told and teach all children the moving struggle of an oppressed people that overtime began to regard a country that their grandparents were brought as slaves, as their home too?

Children that burn crosses didn't just dream this idea up from nowhere. It's not genetic, it's taught. There's a source somewhere and we need to find it and squash it.

My thoughts too.

Nada i was agreeing with ya

I'm just saying that racism is more than just black and white .... it actually does not discriminate and can cross any group of people ...... regardless of colour

Origins of the Burning Cross,

In Scotland, the fiery cross, known as the Crann Tara, was used as a declaration of war. The sight of it commanded all clan members to rally to the defense of the area. On other occasions, a small burning cross would be carried from town to town. The most recent known use was in 1745, during the Jacobite Rising^[2] and was subsequently described in the novels and poetry of Walter Scott.

Though some members of the Ku Klux Klan were descended from immigrants from Scotland, there is no evidence to suggest that their ancestors brought this tradition with them to America. (from Wikipedia)

Wouldn't it be great to change the "meaning" of a burning cross to mean "Love and Enlightenment?"

Wonderingg said: 

Kilnerad, I am not attacking you because you are black, I am posting this because you are narrow minded and arrogant.

_______________________________________________________________________

Thanks Wonderingg. 

 Waterfall and Ninjafaery:

Thanks for the positive words.  I really think we all should be hurting because the world we are supposed to be sharing - living in interconnectedness - is anything but shared in events like this.

I would stand with Canada's own Black leadership legends (Harriet Tubman, Josiah Henson, Wilbur K. Howard - who was the first Black person to graduate from Emmanuel College - a Toronto-based theology school affiliated with the UCC; who was also the first Black person to be ordained in the United Church; and also was the first Black person to become Moderator of the UCC) and their responses to the suffering of their people wasn't to fight terror with terror, but to continually work to liberate their people whether it made them look like they were, as one person says, "narrow minded and arrogant."

So, I thank you two for your words.

Also, Rev. Steven Davis, were you as surprised as I to see somebody post an official policy on racism from GC37?

Steven, in response to your original post, I think I hear what you're saying.  We live in the same region and our experiences are different - you are white and I am black - and to some that matters and to some it doesn't.

It matters to me because as I continue to do some research on Wilbur K. Howard, I noticed in one of the UC Observer articles about Wilbur, on becoming Moderator in 1974, that they mentioned that he was a "3rd or 4th generation Canadian" and yet today, though I am a 6th or 7th generation Canadian I can still go to many places in Southwestern Ontario and elicit, especially during winter, "Are you used to this weather?"  It is a hidden way of asking me whether I am from this country or not.  I place it alongside racism because there is an assumption in the question about what a "real Canadian" ought to look like.

Another time I remember living in the K-W region and being pulled over in front of my house with a buddy of mine (who was white) in the passenger seat.  They asked me a series of questions and then let me go.  As we are driving away my buddy says, "Why did they ask you if this was your car?  I have never been asked that?"  I was like, "WOW, that's insane."

Those are, in fact, great examples of exactly what I was saying. It truly boggles my mind that anyone would ask if you're used to the weather. I'm fairly confident that I would never ask that question unless I knew in fact that a person was a relative newcomer to the country. I've certainly never been asked that question. I agree that the question probably represents a typical stereotype about what a Canadian really is (or at least what a Canadian actually looks like.) In that sense, it's probably a race-based (and, thus, racist) question. And, yes, I've heard many stories of black people being asked "do you own the car." I can say that I was asked that question - once - by a U.S. border guard while crossing into Buffalo. It took me aback, because I'd never heard it before. (Maybe you're more likely to have a car bomb in a rental than in one you actually own?) On rare occasions we have heard the question "is she really your daughter?" (we adopted our daughter from China) although the more vulgar question - which does come up, albeit rarely - is usually "how much did she cost?" One would think that the stereotype of the "real" Canadian would be dying in southern Ontario (at least in urban areas), where there is great racial and cultural diversity. 

 Somewhere at some point I believe I have seen a picture of your family - and so you are right in the thick of it too.  Considering your first statement, I think you underestimate how much you probably do "get it".

I grew up in Sarnia and I remember not long after 9/11 I was driving my an older sister (who happens to be Native/Aboriginal/First Nations) across the river (Sarnia, ON to Port Huron, Michigan).  I probably drove her across the bridge once or twice a week for 10 weeks straight.  Every single time we crossed and said that we were "family" we were forced to get out of our car so it could be searched.  We were neither the hated demographic of the day (Arab) nor the despised religion of the day (Muslim), but were two different "racial" groups that called each other "brother" and "sister" - because we legally were and are.  So obviously we must have been up to something.  We, however, weren't asked about payments such as you were.  I'm actually slightly surprised by that.

Peace,

A

Lets just say that those that make a mockery of old myth and their meanings ... haven't got a qlue!

The burning cross is a symbol of love in incidence with light (metaphysical par's) ... producing an aware love.

Do many see that, or just subscribe to following the heart blindly ... burn the whole earth in Roman tradition. There is a hint to the meaning of Hadrians Wall ... where the Emperor Hadrian couldn't go ... the highlands? Da sole man ... he coun't think worth chit, chat or whatever. The roots of the Masonic Tradition appear to be in standing up to the corrupt authorities ... dangerous Job. In the process a new corrupt tradition spun off the Meis-UN IC tradition ... without knowing what the aboriginal stood for. Real people are like that ... few clues ... and they boldly express ... intelligence is evil ... it sure is without balanced care for all of creation that supports you. Walk softly ... leave light footprints that tickle the fantasy of God ... a well ablanced singularity in string theory that acknowledges that we know less than 10% of all dark matter and energy ... an omen? Perhaps Am'n in physical beauty needing recall ... contrary to institutionalized thought at this change on any form of evolution and they close there bible with the Book of ... oh meis ...

All this from a shadow personae ...?

i agree.  to the opposite of pinga's thread, hate is hate.  i doubt these people are limited to their prejudice.  for example, hitler's hate wasn't limited to just the jewish population.

i wish we were able to fight together, not just for black rights, women's rights, children's rights, aboriginal rights---- how about human rights.  these acts of hate go beyond black and white.  yes it is sad that acts like this still exist, but we still have war, poverty and genocide happening in countries to people by their own people and governments. 

jess is right, hate exists beyond colour and i would like to add beyond age, gender, sexuality, race, religion to name just a few.  we need to find the common thread that binds us, as humans and stewards of this planet.  hate is hate.  as long as we have children who are sold in the sex trade, women who are beaten for attending school, genocide in sudan/darfur/rwanda, animals killed just for their teeth/fur/etc, unjust "family" law, muslims versus christians, etc/etc/etc - you will have acts such us these.  no, i don't know what it is like to be black, but i know discrimination.  i know prejudice.  there is our thread.

 Adam, you're probably right. I've never considered those two questions about my daughter to be racist, but they are certainly race-based (ie, white parents of a white child wouldn't be asked those questions) so they are racist in that sense. I choose to believe that they are (while "racist" in that sense) not antagonist or negative but are rather perhaps poorly worded statements of curiosity about the process (ie, both are attempts to ask, "how did she become your daughter?") But you're right, although I've never thought about it in that sense, I suppose I have experienced what might be called racism (or, race-based comments anyway.) When we moved to our current church (about 4 months before travelling to China to get Hannah) we were delighted that another couple in the church had done a Chinese adoption a year before. The "curiosity factor" of the congregation was over, in other words, and Hannah was just accepted in the church as the minister's daughter. It was never an issue. We now have three children in our congregation adopted from China (perhaps the third family having come because of that same comfort level, I don't know; I've never asked them.)

In answer to the question about cost, we have friends who also adopted their daughter from China who say "it costs about as much as it cost when you had your daughter - the difference is OHIP picked up the cost for you."

I grew up in a part of Canada that was a northern terminus of the underground railroad.  It took a generation or two before the descendants of the escaped former slaves were accepted; although they were considered equal in opportunity when they arrived due, in large part, to the efforts of the Rev. William King.  I have never experienced racism but discrimination because of disability and illness.  I was called cripple, hopalong, moron, stupid, retard, looney, etc.  Having been beaten, abused and even sexually assaulted 'because they could' and I couldn't fight back has made me more sensitive to issues of discrimination on the groups of race, disability, religion, etc.  (The abuse happened at school and, yes, even at church (for the sexual abuse.  btw, I am male)!  As an 11 year old, I was taken down and had my clothes removed by my brother and his friend while the girls were encouraged to 'fondle'.  (I ratted him out, and he got the spanking of his life.)  I raised my sons to respect all people.  My oldest son was dating a black girl for a while.  They broke up for other than issues of race.  My youngest son went out of his way to ensure a chld with a developmental disability was included in his cub pack.  It's too bad others can't look beyond the packaging to see the value and treasure they have within other people   Get even with them.... PRAY FOR THEM.  IT'LL TEACH THEM A LESSON.

What! Teach them a lesson ... that would be like gathering intelligence and a minister said right here on Wonder Cafe: "Intellect is evil!"

Perhaps we should question all things that are passed off as wisdom ... it's biblical and don't ministers hate to pass a sermon on that particular script! (I Thess 5:21)

Perhaps it would send ripples through that dark pool we call mind ... bring on a change? As institutionalized brutes ... could we have that .. like a tongue in cheek ... a bump in space (Marian L'Engle)?

Wonderingg...I'm sorry, but that sounds a whole lot like white supremacy talking.

I am not certain it is possible for anybody but the majority to be racist, because being racist is directly linked to power - generally political, social, economic, etc.

I'm wondering if you might want to expand on your concept that racism is directly linked to power? According to Oxford, the definition of racism is "the belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race" or "discrimination against or antagonism towards other races." None of that (with the possible exception of discrimination) seems to necessitate that the racist must possess power over the object of their racism. A powerless person can certainly be racist (ie, hold deep antagonism) toward those of other races, can't they? I'm not closed to the possibility of the connection, but I admit I don't understand it - why is racism necessarily linked to power? 

Hi Steven:

I relate racism to power because the way even the word has emerged and the contexts from which the term has come from.

You raise such a good question and I'm fearful to put forth an answer because there are so many caveats and nuances to the answer.  But please bear with me as I put forth the most glaring realities with regard to your question.

One nuance to begin with, before I specifically answer your question, is to begin by saying that this position is not one that attempts to allow non-White peoples to say anything they want about their blessed neighbours.  These ideas are still built upon the moral foundation that speaking evil (that is, anything that would tear down that person) against your brother or sister (aka the salt of the earth) is atrocity in and of itself.

Taking a look at dictionary definitions and the etymologies of the word racist and its variants is interesting.  According to Douglas Harper from the Online Etymology Dictionary (www.etymonline.com) offers this as food for thought:

racist

So it appears (by conjecture in this definition) that the term emerges when racial minorities (Jews, Blacks, and Aboriginals, etc.) end up with the short end of the stick.

The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy considers the term similarly:

The belief that some races are inherently superior (physically, intellectually, or culturally) to others and therefore have a right to dominate them. In the United States, racism, particularly by whites against blacks, has created profound racial tension and conflict in virtually all aspects of American society. Until the breakthroughs achieved by the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s, white domination over blacks was institutionalized and supported in all branches and levels of government, by denying blacks their civil rights and opportunities to participate in political, economic, and social communities.

The key point being made here is that there are two sides to the coin - not simply believing you are better than those who look differently than you - but also that one's belief that others are inferior leads them to subordinate (take action against) those they believe are inferior (because of their race).

There are many cases where minorities have acted aggressively against the majority, but to call this racism is ludicrous.  It would be ridiculous to call even the militant Malcolm-X a racist because those oppressing his people socially, politically, and economically were lynching negroes and forcing them to the backs of buses and helping to create Chocolate cities with vanilla suburbs all across America (that nation continues to suffer from that phenomenon today).  In Canada they were tossing Aboriginals into residential schools to be like the dominant racial group.

I think that the only way the minority becomes "racist" is in colonial situations like South Africa - but that case is so interesting because the reliance on power was central to the white supremacist governance that controlled the shape of economic and political reality for the black and brown majority.  

So, if I were to offer insight about the idea of racism, I would start talking not only about how individuals interact, but also about how institutions of the nations allow certain people access and others limited access.  The presidency of the USA has been, until last year, inaccessible to Black, Brown, Red, and Yellow - the White House, till last year, only knew one colour - the White House is now going through a time of searching as its most precious rooms and beds are home to people of colour.

But do our institutions allow some in and keep others out?  How do our institutions in this country have relationship with First Nations people or descendants of Chinese transcontinental rail workers, or descendants of Japanese internment camps, or the descendants of fugitive slaves who came to Canada to escape slavery?  The documents I have in my possession seem to point to the fact that the power-brokers tend to respond by the state of their power - After the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act Black people in southern Ontario became seen more as a nuisance than a novelty as they began coming to Canada in droves, because southern plantation owners could now cross the Mason-Dixon line and drag these slaves back to the cotton fields.

So that's my statement on racism and its relationship to power.

Make sense or should I further explain?

kilnerad,

Good points! I take the expressions a wee bit further ... those in power are frightened to death by all they know, that they perceive as below them. This is the nature of the shadow of the mind/soul ... frightened of IT's very shadow ... doubt!

I have a good friend from the Caribean, of whom I've learned a great deal of the mystery of different spiritual practices ... connecting to all there is (a slur on God to those that take God as physical limitation ... Vue Due?) the non-physical, or metaphysical included. What did the European roots of America know of the mysteries of Africa? No more than the words in the bible that spoke of Nubian creatures! This could be translated into script on a white page of parchment ... "Vanilla Sky Syndrome"/blank expanse, needing word)  of satyr on what the English knew of Celtic spirituality ... when the English King was accepted as being God's representative. What did they know eh ... of that vast expanse of the Isle of Skye in allegory that pure English thought as devilish as the Hebrew expression (King Jame's thoughts as an illiterate royalty that liked to bug wee buoys)? Did Charles Dickens take this a step further when the terms he used for the overseers of orphanages used soem pretty witty and allegorical language ... beadles?

My cCribean friend told me that in Africans ... "James/J'aimes" is a word for the slave keeper ... a sense of oppressive spirit if you catch the drift. Does a blank mind in space of ivory towers appreciate what is unknown to them? The expression to me by so many authorities in the institutions of belief and education tell us: "Don't go there!" My impression is if you ask them something they don't know ... you will be treated as the dirt we walk upon ... fertile bottom land ferme ... fecund stuff that we all end up in to support the cycle of painful learning. The rich and powerful choose  the easy way ... ignore IT, we don't need that just here and now ... without regard for the future ... their children, grandchildren and so on. It is a brutal thought, contained in the dark sea of stories ... totally misunderstood from the perspective of the vastly illiterate. Where does one find this knowledge ... in the midst, medium of a vast paradigm ... peoples that learn to care and think of one another ... subliminal process?

We couldn't do that could we ... it would cost so much?

The options? Do such temple institutions fall in the lessons of the past? All things change even the island we stand upon moves. Take that in all the variable metaphor you can ... works for me in understanding the hue-Mon experiment of where to bury the soul that mankind doesn't have to deal with it until they cross the line ... like a riva in the san ... nihilistic? It reminds one of the Cadeucus, simile of the rod of Moses ... de rived truth from deep inside the conscious bean?

One of the best modern expressions of the fall of an institution was contained in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest ... when the agitator of the pool (Murphy's Roue') was oppressed ... the aboriginal spirit went over the hill ... the institution fell like the fall of Billy ... acronym for "Will" without a thought ... just disturbance of the desires! It's a dark place and unknowing persons don't go there ... darkness ... like word has taken an awfull impression ever since the Romans made intellect and caring illegal for common slaves ... the bulk of the population as known by Karl Marx as the Maas's ... ancien tword for processing facility of the mind ... oppressed and denied as the story of Black 'n Able ... Hell? When asked what did you learn Meis UN? We can say: been there, done that ... and the unknowing won't know what the question meant ... no subtile undercurrents there!

It is an enigma, to go inside, one has to work at the outside forces ... isn't that a devil of a trickstir to get A' mon to think? Modern M'N (U'V) is at loss to this process ... it is a fact of isolationsism ... routes of the word M'N, or Maan ... depending on the linguistic tradition!

Do we know enough to get around the daedly obstacleof the death wish? Gnoe that we don't wish to ... in true biblical institution ... ID must fall to thought ... that's as far ash Egos ... until the superlative form ... hommoe (omi) in old words of the former ... Poet Eire? Worker of cle' ... pussy foot'n (pedagogue Aries) around in the shadows of ...

Regards,

WB

Did you just call me a white supremacist? Sigh... I don't even feel like responding to this, but, here goes:

I made that comment as a response to your blanket statement that the family in Windsor/all black or mixed race families in the Maritimes didn't want or appreciate the support of their predominantly white community, which in my opinion, was ridiculous. If I can take your response further, am I to assume that because I am part of the majority, if I take issue with what you say, that I am racist - simply because you are black? Further, am I to assume that you, being a minority, are allowed to call me a white supremacist without any response from me? Is it racist for me to disagree with a member of any minority?

I'd like you to explain to me why disagreeing with your arrogant statement (in a discussion forum) makes me a white supremacist.

Wonderingg:

Nobody called you anything.  Please re-read my response to you.

Whatever

Freedom of Speech. A fundamental Human Right. It's not just about what's acceptable and politically correct. It's about being allowed to say whatever you want. Even if people don't like it! So yeah it sucks we still have beligerently racist twits roaming the earth, but it's life and they're entitled to say whatever they want. They can't do anything about it anyways, so if you just ignore them rather than feed their hatred by talkig about it, they'll eventually realize people think they're idiots and hopefully shut up. 

That said. Racism at the systematic level is a power-problem between majority and minority groups, often whites versus the rest of the world. But at the individual level, it's not a one-way street. Minority groups absolutely can be racist! Racism is simply discriminating by skin color or ethnicity. Pure and simple. When any person uses profanities and insults refering to culture or race, it is racism, regardless of where they come from or how entitled they think they are to speak that way. Of course we call it "reverse-racism" when the discrimination is against fair-skinned folk, but this shows that racist people of minority groups do exist. And as long as ANY race or culture thinks it's okay to judge someone by the color of their skin or the culture (history) they come from, there will be racist groups of people.  

 I believe Cheri DeNova comments on the UCC in The Observer is applicable to racism as well. There is a challenge with our type of structure when local congregations do not pick up on issues involving the whole community.

I started elementary school in Halifax just after the North end of the city was "ethnically cleansed". I wonder if any UCC took a stand than. Does any one know?

I know many more people of African and and First Nations today because over 13% of new cases of HIV are coming from people of African ancestry, and over 20% are of First Nations ancestry. These group are less then 4% and 3% of the Canadian population.  It's less and less a disease of gay men in Canada, it is more and more a disease of colonialism. In some US cities that rate in African American Neighbourhoods are as high as they are in Southern Africa.  This will be the case soon in Canadian First Nations Communities, and African Canadian Communities.

The stigma associated with HIV means we are discriminated against and excluded, thus we tend to associate with each other. having HIV provides you with a education on the results of racism.

First Nations have twice the rate of physical disabilities, and likely much greater number of other disabilities and illnesses.  Survivors and their children and grandchildren of the worst kinds of colonialism are facing major epidemics causing disabilities today.

Other larger and smaller denominations in Canada have accessibility plans. The UCC does not and few local UCC have access plans.

You are more likely to be working on minimum wage or on social welfare if you are disabled or belong to First Nations and African Canadian communities.

We need to do something in the UCC, we are broken because we exclude people.

I was impressed by the GC when they listen to survivors of residential schools. However listening is something that we as Christians should be doing in our pastoral care work.  We need to do more. I feel sometimes that I am alone in raising these issues. I know I am not the only one concerned in the UCC, I just feel like it.

http://www.accessiblechurch.ca/

Remeber Africville from the NFB

http://www.nfb.ca/film/remember_africville/

Footprints:

I hear what you are saying on the issue of racism and I am glad you are thinking about it the way you are - which is very thorough - so I applaud your comments and hope to continue a critical engagement.

I would say, however, that I think it is difficult to buy your position about "the individual level" because, as I see it, the individual level is only a smaller segment of the larger whole.  Therefore, if our institutions and customs reflect those of the majority, our personal relationships are more likely to be understood in the context of our cultural surroundings.  I think it is highly problematic to be trying to separate what happens at the person-to-person level and the larger cultural framework that we exist in because that assumes we can "turn-on" and "turn off" those things that influence us beyond the self.

This is one of the reasons I am very torn about whether "reverse-racism" is even possible.   

 Been doing a lot of thinking about your concept of racism. I see where you're going with it, but I'm not sure I can agree with it. You say, for example, that "I am not certain it is possible for anybody but the majority to be racist, because being racist is directly linked to power." You're assuming a link between racism and power. and you're assuming that being the majority necessarily grants a particular group power over others. By your argument, therefore, we would have to say that the apartheid system of South Africa was not racist, because it was put in place not by a majority but by a minority. Yes, it was definitely a minority with power - but that undermines the necessary relationship in your argument between majority status and racism.

I think it's dangerous to assume that the majority always has power and the minority always lacks power. We'd have to work on our definition of "power" in order to determine this. Power is an often fluid thing that depends on the inter-relationships between the various groups in society and the issues being addressed. If power is fluid, and if racism is linked to power, than racism is not quite so easily defined as you suggest; of being simply an attitude that only the majority can possess because only the majority has power. Sometimes the minority has great power if the minority's support is required to push ahead the agenda of the majority.

Hi Steven:

I hear your point (I also want to affirm with you that I would find it dangerous as well to assume that a numerical majority cannot be racist), and thus want to further build on what I said in an earlier post and remind you that, as I said before, the stuff about minorities in rule over majority peoples is a highly nuanced discussion because they are not the norm - although they aren't unknown (two examples are South Africa and the British colonial control over what now is India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh).

We also must keep in mind that discussions on race are always uncomfortable and that in our conversation about these things we continue to affirm the equality of all people - Black, White, Red, Yellow...

You will note that I mentioned the situation in South Africa previously.  I think it is far more dangerous to assume that racism is not connected to power - the majority issue is far more nuanced - you will note that the minority South African government was related to a majority power worldwide connected with European colonialism (so was the situation in British India that Gandhi and his people were able to overcome) that has, on its hands, the deaths of 100 million aboriginal peoples in the Americas, thousands and thousands of enslaved negroes, and thousands of black South Africans.

In terms of the majority, you will note that the terminology has various meanings - majority can refer to the number of people or the control of a government over legislation.  In South Africa you will note that, in general, Black peoples, though statistically the majority of people in South Africa, could not vote, and hence politically were not the majority - they were merely nothing - the same way that Aboriginal peoples  and African American slaves were politically nothing for hundreds of years.  To that end, the White political majority in South Africa, because of its colonial ties, had access to technological, legislative, military, and economic power that relegated Black South Africans to the rural shanty-towns.

So I do submit, as I did previously, that South Africa, in terms of "majority" of people is an anomaly to a more generic understanding of majority, but, at the same time, it does not undermine the fact that racism is always linked to power, because the history of terms like "racism", "racialism", etc. emerged in colonial situations where the powerful (those with majority control - either numerically or through colonial institutions who were able to take control of other people's land through more advanced technology and military strength, etc.) were oppressing others.

So, in summary, I affirm your concern about the use of a generic term like "majority" that could assume that if a person is part of the numerical minority of a country (but the legislative majority of that nation) that they could not be a racist.  Very good point you make here.

God bless,

Adam